[quote who="DarkSide73" reply="35" id="2845442"]The modifications that have been made to this game are very intense and have greatly improved playability throughout, which also ups the fun factor. Yet all these dudes care about if they can give a skirt a sword and send her to be slaughtered with the rest of your worthless stock. Leave your women at home - my men will meet them soon enough. [/quote] You know, even if you'd
[quote who="Wintersong" reply="27" id="2845300"] Stardock should change it to 0 points (or one day add someting that makes interesting to be egalitarian beyond "Oh, Women with a Stick!".[/quote] Yeah, either 0 or just get rid of it entirely and let you choose whether you want to make female troops in the design screen. I'm hard pressed to think of what they could do with it. When morale still existed they could have given egalitarian societies a higher morale bonus
[quote who="Mhantra" reply="10" id="2845179"] Quoting heyhellowhatsnew, reply 7Can we make female soldiers now? Or is it still sexist in the land of Elemental One culture has the "Egalitarian" trait, which allows you to have female soldiers.[/quote] Okay, I'd like an actual answer to this - why does it cost any points at all to have this trait? It is purely aesthetic, and offers absolutely no mechanical benefit.
[quote who="hfbrooklyn" reply="17" id="2841856"]I dont know you, OP, or the rest of the players, but the best advice I can give is be patient. This isn't another RTS like Supreme Commander or StarCraft where you have to rush everything. [/quote] Sir, I can't tell if you're being sarcastic or condescending. [quote who="hfbrooklyn" reply="17" id="2841856"]Just keep close to main base for a good many turns until it's got a big inf ring. At least then monsters will
[quote who="HallowedBMyName" reply="8" id="2841638"]As reply #7 says, a bit stronger is better than too weak. I would recommend you just lower your world difficulty a bit and see if that helps you.[/quote] Okay, I'm only playing on Medium, so that shouldn't really factor into it. Also, it's not that they're "a little bit stronger". I can take a mob or two in fights. My problem is with the sheer numbers. I eventually just get overwhelmed.
Hello, I've checked around and I seem to be the only one having a problem with this, but the game is completely unplayable for me due to the high numbers of wandering critters and bandits that now exist. I've started five games in the last hour, and all of them saw my first and only city destroyed by creatures within 20-30 turns. I even got knocked out of the game on turn 10 by a group of spiders (CR 28) that destroyed my city and the sovereign defending it. Again,
[quote who="Themysticeye" reply="9" id="2734018"] Quoting Wexmajor, reply 8I agree, either Egalitarian should add some other benefit or drop the point cost. Quoting KillzEmAllGod, reply 3 one point isn't much at all could just add it the ability to your faction in Xml if your cheap. Why are there apologists for every little thing? No, it's not being cheap. A purely visual/thematic effect should n
I looked in both the manual and the Faction creator, and as far as I can tell there's no extra benefit to the Egalitarian trait besides being able to design female troops (the manual doesn't even mention the word 'Egalitarian'). So if my wife (whom I bought this game for specifically because you can create female sovereigns and troops) wants to have an army of women, she has to pay an extra point. That's just bad form.
Hmm, I knew about the colony ships being high priority, but I didn't think scouts could also be used like that. It does seem weird though, when I can have my scout run around the entire grav well being chased by the enemy and they ignore my fleet ripping their butts to shreds.
Hello, [Bug] I've noticed when I play that the some neutral AI vessels prioritize scouts more highly than combat ships. If a scout is in the system prior to another fleet jumping in, AI Cruisers, LFs, and Siege Frigates will continue to target the scout ship over any other target. LRFs and Flak, however, will switch to units that they can damage effectively (ie: LRFs target LFs, Flak target fighters/bombers). Also, if the scout is destroyed or jumps out of the system
[quote who="Raging Amish" reply="9" id="2276747"]Hell. While we're at it. Get rid of quick start. I liked the game better when quick start wasn't there. Quick start makes rushing TOO easy.[/quote] Amazingly enough, you can get rid of it. It's completely optional.
I have to say too, that I find the title of this thread needlessly inflammatory. Calling something 'very broken' implies that the game cannot hold itself together while that thing still exists. Nothing in this thread proves that the Illuminators are destroying the game. You've mentioned that the Illuminator can handidly defeat the Assailant. Your experiments do a decent job of showing that. However, all that demonstrates to me is that there is a problem with th
[quote who="JohnJames" reply="2" id="2271248"]all test were done point blank in order to take full advantage of lums 3 beams. No micro just point blank.[/quote] I suggest you try one where you actually allow the Vasari to have the advatage of a closing fight. Giving the Advent the advantage right off the bat skews the test in their favour already. That's not something you want if you're trying to prove that they're overpowered.
Hello, I just wanted to make some comments on the new AI (playing on Hard, using the Quick Start option): 1) General - the AI is much more aggressive now. They seem to be willing to take greater risks to cripple other factions in the early game. It adds a lot more tension to the beginning of the game. 2) Fleet vs Fleet - the AI is much better at handing the player pyrrhic victories in fleet engagements, only withdrawing if it seems utterly hopeless. <p
In response to the OP, if you do not meet the minimum requirements, you will not be able to run the game effectively. Both my friend and I have computers that are well above the stated requirements, and even then it still slows down noticeably. It's quite rediculous really. There's barely anything going on in the SP game at any one time to warrent it hogging the system resources.
Sins Forums
Hello, I'm something of an amateur historian, and lately I've been interested in trying to organize the history of the game, both in terms of development (what were the designers shooting for, what changes did they make and why), and strategy (how have the continual changes to the game altered the strategy of players, what differences can be found between the single and multiplayer experience?). This is going to be quick and dirty for now, but hopefully it can be expanded
Sins Forums
[quote who="CreditSuisse" reply="1" id="2072776"]So you're advocating we cahnge nothing and let the Sova and the Vasari one stay limited in use and not very competitive?[/quote] Not at all. All I'm saying is that you cannot advocate that change is necessary without proof. Just because some of the community doesn't believe that the capital carriers (or capital ships in general) are worthwhile investments doesn't mean that they are not a valuable part of the game as they are
Sins Forums
[quote who="Ryat" reply="23" id="2071241"] Quoting S_Holmes, reply 22Just to make a quick correction to some bad math in the OP. The Sova costs 3000 credits. The TEC carriers cost 835. So you can have about 3.5 for the price of a Sova, not six. That equals 7 sc from carriers(assuming u can build a half cc ) to the six that Sova can carry.[/quote] Actually, just ignore my last post, since it's irrelevent. Comparing light carr
Sins Forums
Just to make a quick correction to some bad math in the OP. The Sova costs 3000 credits. The TEC carriers cost 835. So you can have about 3.5 for the price of a Sova, not six.
I have both Steam and Impulse on my computer, and I have to say I greatly prefer Impulse. I currently live in South Korea, but all of my banking info (PayPal account, CC, etc...) has my residence in Canada. Steam does not let me purchase games in their store because I am in one place and my money comes from another. Impulse does. Win for Impulse.
Ok, thanks!
Are we allowed to put up recordings of games using the beta of Entrenchment, or would that be a violation of some kind?
[quote who="Caydr" reply="1" id="2051850"]What troubles me more is the fact you specifically mention that you were always on the offensive. I was still kinda hoping that other people weren't suffering from dormant AI syndrome.[/quote] Only in the last game against the Vasari, and now that you mention it, they didn't seem to be building up with the same... I don't know... verve as the TEC. I always had the advantage in numbers, unless I really got complacent.
Hello, I just spent the day completing three 1v1 (opponents and maps generated randomly) games to test out the new Entrenchment expansion 2.5 beta, and I thought I'd post some comments while the games were still fresh in my mind. First off, some general impressions: 1) I just like to say that I had FUN playing these games. I enjoyed vanilla SINS greatly, and Entrenchment really improves on a good thing. 2) I don't know if, with the added defensive technolog
[quote who="Peter Ebbesen" reply="1" id="2043592"] With the change in the targetting for the anti-structure cruisers, they are certainly not useless in a battle once defences are gone. In one battle against the Advent, they had twenty of the thing pouring 58 plasma damage each (double that of the Destras) into my ships. Chewed everything but capital ships to pieces. I am impressed that the torpedo ships could chew up your fleet given that, according to the data files /gameinfo/gam
Elemental Forums